Talk:Maeko Matsuo
Japanese honorifics Japanese "honorifics" are much more complicated than the article indicates, and Matsuo's usage of "-san" and "-sama" violate the rules of politeness (in this case, "kenjougo") because presumably, she would consider Stirling and Anoleis to be part of her "in-group", and thus, accordingly, she would NOT ascribe any honorific suffixes to Anoleis' in speech/writing. As such, I have tried to edit the article accordingly, and hope others reading it will find it easy to understand. -rtl42 :Thanks for helping to improve the page. Some questions: first, how do you know this (if you don't mind my asking)? Second, since Benezia is hundreds-of-years Matuso's senior, wouldn't it be simply correct to speak of her respectfully? Third, does Matsuo speak of Anoleis? Fourth, would Anoleis, effectively her boss (at any rate, the highest official at Noveria), be part of her "in-group"? --AnotherRho 03:12, September 22, 2010 (UTC) ::Yes I would also like answers to these questions as I can't check them myself. Saves to far from Noveria on my PC to verify. This kind of thing really does need to be answered. Lancer1289 03:29, September 22, 2010 (UTC) :::Yes, the answers would be most appreciated. Also necessary because, let's face it, many of us don't know Japanese or Japanese customs of conversation (yet for all we know, the writers consulted those who do know). Let these questions be asked to anyone with the requisite knowledge. --AnotherRho 04:00, September 22, 2010 (UTC) ::::Indeed. If these questions aren't answered then I'll revert. But I'll let it sit for a few days to wait. We need confirmation on this, and right now I'm very skeptical. Lancer1289 04:12, September 22, 2010 (UTC) :::::I can understand the thought behind some of the content (e.g., that using respectful speech to refer to your peers is considered haughty; for, that could be taken to mean you think you deserve to be spoken of in a high manner), but still don't know. And my other questions still stand anyway, which I'll repeat here for convenience of the readership: :::::(1), how do you know this about Japanese speech (if you don't mind my asking)? (2), since Benezia is hundreds-of-years Matuso's senior, wouldn't it be simply correct to speak of her respectfully? (3), does Matsuo speak of Anoleis and Stirling at all? (4), would Anoleis, effectively her boss (at any rate, the highest official at Noveria), be part of her "in-group"? Thank you. --AnotherRho 04:24, September 22, 2010 (UTC) Yeah, I was actually wondering the same thing after following the link that was added. It makes clear that superiors at work (like Administrator Anoleis) are not part of the in-group, and should be spoken to politely. It also makes clear that persons from other companies would not be considered part of the "in-group" either. And technically, Anoleis isn't part of the same company. He reports directly to the Noveria Development Corporation, while Matsuo is an employee of Elanus Risk Control Services. SpartHawg948 04:52, September 22, 2010 (UTC) First off, I'm an anglophone, but I have been living and studying in Japan for the past couple of years, and have been learning the language and culture along the way. I'm not sure I can give any other "credentials", though (does "my wife is japanese" count?), but I hope that's good enough for people who were wondering how I know what I claim to know. Perhaps to sort out any other bits of confusion, the edit I made originally addressed Maeko's dialogue where she refers to Stirling as "Stirling-san", Benezia as "Benezia-sama", and Anoleis as "Anoleis-sama". Calling Stirling, "Stirling-san" in front of Shephard & Co. seemed like a faux pas to me, and is what originally got me thinking about making the edit. Basically, though, I just wanted to point out that Japanese does not make use of an "absolute" system of honorifics -- just because the Matriach is hundreds of years old doesn't mean everyone refers to her using honorific suffixes. This is because "uchi-soto" (in-group/out-group) is relative (although fixed for each person): using a somewhat standard example, when you are an employee speaking to your employer/"superiors" at work, you are expected to employ respectful language; however, when you are speaking to someone outside of your company/business, and you have to make reference to your employer/"superiors" at work, you do NOT appel honorifics to them, because that would make you (and kinda by extension, your company) arrogant/haughty. So in the former situation, the in-group/out-group boundary is determined by rank WITHIN the company/business; in the latter situation, the boundary is determined by whether someone is in your company or not. (On Wikipedia, refer to the "Japanese_language" article's section on Politeness, in the middle of the 3rd paragraph. This gives a comparison with politness in Korean to illustrate the point.) But the above comments are correct in that, in most situations and for most people, Benezia would be properly referred to using "some" sort of honorific or title. I think before my edit was reverted, I had noted that Maeko "correctly" refers to her using the -sama honorific. The point about Anoleis NOT being in her in-group is a good one, though: I had simply assumed that, as the port administrator, Maeko was somehow on his payroll. The fact that he reports to Noveria Development Corp., whereas she works for ERCS, does mean that it sort of makes sense for her to call him "Anoleis-sama": Noveria is a client for ERCS, so "perhaps" as a term of respect for a member of the client's "in-group" (regardless of stature within the client's in-group, I might add!), Maeko refers to him as "Anoleis-sama". But this partially depends on how close the work relationship between Noveria Development and ERCS is, because lines may blur and rules may bend in that case. So given the nature of the situation, perhaps we can do a partial revert and just indicate that Maeko's way of calling Kaira "Stirling-san" is "slightly different from modern Japanese standards of using honorifics in speech", since Stirling is clearly part of her in-group, and just try to avoid the details about Maeko's work-relation to Anoleis. Rtl42 08:06, September 22, 2010 (UTC) ::Throwing in my two cents - as a lowly and humble student of Japanese at university this is what we've been taught also. Humble and honorific usage is complex, but it is slightly strange for Maeko to refer to her boss - if Anoleis is really her boss - using the -sama address to an outsider (i.e. Shepard). Then again, we don't know the full extent of the social/business relationship, or indeed how much values have shifted in ~180 years. Bronzey 11:18, September 22, 2010 (UTC) :Rtl142, thanks for the response. Yes, your answer reg. credentials is what I was asking about (and yes, if your wife were a native Japanese speaker and were consulted, that could "count"). Anyway... From what you're saying, one could infer that Mr. Miyagi was always speaking inappropriately by referring to Daniel as "Daniel-san"? :Also, I asked about Benezia as I did since you had written "correctly, or at least reasonably", i.e., you qualified = limited your original assertion; whence I had used the unqualified-adverb "simply" in question 2). And I asked because I wondered if the Japanese would speak respectfully of elders in principle; since, e.g., another's being 10-20 times older than oneself is so, regardless of any business or personal (etc.) relations. One might even say that one's being a Matriarch, i.e. "Lord Mother", stands above business distinctions. In that connection, one might ask whether these rules would apply to foreign dignitaries, especially of another species (I suppose for that question we'd have to let the game answer for us). :*However that may be, let's summarize: (A) Mr. Miyagi's usage of -san: correct or incorrect? (B) Benezia-sama: correct. © Anoleis-sama: not her boss, since she works for ERCS, which rents space from Noveria (at a discount in exchange for providing Nov. with security); so correct. Or "perhaps" so (if unsure, perhaps you could ask your native-Japanese-speaking wife? assuming you weren't speaking hypothetically). Perhaps "Parasini-san" would be correct for the same reason. (D) Stirling-san: suspect; however, doesn't Maeko say this to Stirling, directly? I don't recall. And above all, (E) does this form of speech apply to conversations that do not involve "business"? I mean, with the exception of the Noveria execs, none of these people are business-types (soldiers, cops, political or social dignitaries). :If you (or anyone) could answer the couple of questions that remain, I would be very grateful. And, in my opinion at least, if Maeko's speech proves to diverge from modern Japanese usage, then that would be as suitable trivia as the Trivia item that's already in the article. --AnotherRho 19:40, September 23, 2010 (UTC) :: (A) Somehow, I don't remember who Mr. Miyagi is, so I can't comment at the moment. (Can you give me a reference? Searching for "miyagi" on the wikia gives no results.) (B) "Resonable to expect" => correct. © This requires better knowledge of the work relation between ERCS and Noveria Development Corp. at the port; I've tried to give as good an explanation as possible 'for' the use of the "-sama" appellation, but IMHO this question can't be answered "yes or no". (D) Although she may have addressed Stirling as "Stirling-san", there were at least a few times in conversation with Shephard where Maeko will refer to Stirling as "Stirling-san". (Try speaking with Maeko after you've killed Stirling and the other security personnel in Lorik's office. This can also net you a couple of paragon points that aren't mentioned in the wiki anywhere.) (E) This form of speech applies everywhere, in all aspects of life; business/work environments are just easier for giving examples. Rtl42 23:07, September 23, 2010 (UTC) ::: The reference to "Mr. Miyagi" and "Daniel-san" are a reference to a movie called "The Karate Kid"; in that movie, Keisuke Miyagi (the mentor figure for the protagonist; I'm guessing that the name is a combination of the names of Shotokan Karate legend Keinosuke Enoeda and Goju Ryu Karate founder Chojun Miyagi) often refers to Daniel, his protege, as "Daniel-san". :::I'll post up some here regarding the honorifics for a bit, but take it with the proverbial grain of salt, as I too am far from an expert. My understanding is essentially that which Rtl42 stated: one doesn't use any honorific language (not even -san, which merely means "Mr./Ms.") when referring to someone who is in-group when in the presence of someone who is out-group. :::For an example, if one worked in a Japanese company and one's boss was a CEO by the name of Yamada, one would likely address him/her as Yamada-san ("Mr./Ms. Yamada"), Yamada-shacho ("Company-Leader CEO Yamada") or just as Shacho ("Company Leader" or CEO), but if someone from another company (i.e. someone who is out-group from the context of one's company) were to call up and ask if CEO Yamada was around, one would reply to the questioner that Yamada (no title at all, not even "Yamada-san") was or wasn't around. So it's a bit strange to me that Maeko Matsuo would refer to the others, who are in-group to her (as fellow Noverian guardsmen) but out-group to Shepard (an Alliance soldier and Council agent), with honorific words (-san, -sama, etc.) in the presence of the "outsider" Shepard. :::It isn't just a business relations thing; if one is speaking to someone about, say, family, one would use polite words to refer someone else's family members, but only basic words to refer to one's own family members, as the other person would be out-group to the context (i.e. one's own family). The Supreme Deity 03:51, September 24, 2010 (UTC) ::::So basically what you guys are saying is that (1) the -san of respect is determined by whether or not the listener(s) can be said to belong to the category or class (any "group") to which the speaker, and the one spoken of, belong. So, e.g., if Maeko were still in the Alliance (as she had been a marine for many years), she would be correct to use it of Sterling (who is, to boot, her subordinate) since Shepard is still an Alliance soldier. - (Frankly in all of this I'm apprehensive because these are soldiers (or private soldiers), who have ranks; and so my guess would have been that the rules of discourse and interaction would differ in such a case). ::::And so (2) we summarize what we have: basically, that everything is either correct, or correct as far as we can estimate. Except in the case of the subordinate officer Sterling (whom Maeko later speaks of as an outsider, in that she did not abide by Maeko's general order), which might be incorrect according to modern usage. If there's certainty of divergence in this case, I don't see why the trivia couldn't be slightly altered to reflect that (but that's only my opinion). ::::Sorry about the Mr. Miyagi reference Rtl142; since you said you were an anglophone, I presumed you would have at least heard of this famous character from that (bizzarely) famous movie. (That said, if you have an opinion on that, I'd be curious to hear it!). Thanks everyone for discussing this. ::::Oh, and (3): that the Mass Effect Morality Guide lacks info on possible paragon points for talking to Maeko after killing Sterling. However things turn out regarding this discussion, it is certain that the mentioned Guide could be improved, if the numbers and circumstances were correctly noted. --AnotherRho 04:17, September 24, 2010 (UTC) ::::: Well, what I'm trying to say is that it's incorrect to say things like: " '-sama' is used when addressing or referring to one's social superiors," which is still in the Trivia section. That makes it sound like Japanese uses an absolute system of honorifics, which is not true. Honorific language is based on two factors: (A) the speaker's relation to the listener; and (B) the speaker's relation to a person he/she refers to in conversation. (B) holds for an absolute system of honorific language, but (A) is what distinguishes polite Japanese from languages with absolute honorifics. In any case, despite being slightly incorrect here and there, Maeko's dialogue isn't horribly misleading or anything -- rather, what was written in the Trivia section was why I tried to edit it in the first place. I've edited the article to what I think is a factual and concise explanation of the concept in the Trivia section, and I hope everyone finds it acceptable. (Incidentally, I don't remember if I've seen The Karate Kid or not; if I have, I completely forgot the characters' names.) Rtl42 04:47, September 24, 2010 (UTC)